Feature Request: Rate this cache

[sdarken]

I'm in favor of a basic rating system. I wouldn't find one very useful for my own local area where I have the time to read about each cache and decide if it's something I would find interesting however when I travel to a new area, I don't have time to trawl through hundreds of caches and thousands of logs. A rating system would give me the ability to focus on a few interesting caches.

 

GCVote has been mentioned a few times. Take a look at this screenshot showing GCVotes on caches around Berlin, Germany where GCVote is used quite frequently.

 

In the GCVote system:

5 stars = great

4 stars = good

3 stars = average

2 stars = not good

1 star = poor

What you find is that people don't generally rate caches below 3 (and if they do you'll probably find it's a real stinker). Typically, average caches end up with 3 stars.

 

On this screen shot, the multi called "Jolle Sein Milljöh (Spandauer Vorstadt Berlin)" has a 5 star rating after 19 votes. That's all the information that I need to take a closer look. It doesn't necessarily mean it's a cache I'll visit. I would still need to read the description and logs to understand why it gets a high ranking but it's a quick way to identify a good cache from lots of average caches.

 

Edited November 8, 2009 by sdarken

[+tindling]

I'm in favor of a basic rating system. I wouldn't find one very useful for my own local area where I have the time to read about each cache and decide if it's something I would find interesting however when I travel to a new area, I don't have time to trawl through hundreds of caches and thousands of logs. A rating system would give me the ability to focus on a few interesting caches.

 

GCVote has been mentioned a few times. Take a look at this screenshot showing GCVotes on caches around Berlin, Germany where GCVote is used quite frequently.

 

In the GCVote system:

5 stars = great

4 stars = good

3 stars = average

2 stars = not good

1 star = poor

What you find is that people don't generally rate caches below 3 (and if they do you'll probably find it's a real stinker). Typically, average caches end up with 3 stars.

 

On this screen shot, the multi called "Jolle Sein Milljöh (Spandauer Vorstadt Berlin)" has a 5 star rating after 19 votes. That's all the information that I need to take a closer look. It doesn't necessarily mean it's a cache I'll visit. I would still need to read the description and logs to understand why it gets a high ranking but it's a quick way to identify a good cache from lots of average caches.

 

[image removed]

 

Thanks for this post! This is exactly what I wanted to say and why I want to have a native system.

 

Greets Stefan

Edited November 9, 2009 by tindling

[+Team Cotati]

I thought this was a subject for Tuesdays? Has the schedule changed and the rating threads are Friday now?

Yes, they are now on Friday and only on Friday.

I'm sorry, but comments for posters making self-congratulatory lame posts about "this thread is only for xxxdays" are now restricted to the 15th of each month.

 

Thanks for your cooperation.

 

Thank you. I'll try my best to comply with your request. However please understand that from time to time, things that I consider my civic duty may take precedence.

 

I'm sure that you can appreciate that.